DOCSLIB.ORG

The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty Between Timor-Leste and Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty Between Timor-Leste and Australia ISPSW Strategy Series: Focus on Defense and International Security Issue The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty No. 573 between Timor-Leste and Australia Dr. Anne-Marie Schleich Sep 2018 The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty between Timor-Leste and Australia Dr. Anne-Marie Schleich September 2018 Abstract The historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty between Timor-Leste and Australia was the result of a new and unique conciliation process established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It demarcated for the first time maritime boundaries between the two nations and increased the revenue sharing ratio of the gas reserves in favour of Timor-Leste. The speedy and efficient UNCLOS conciliation process promises to become a role model for the settlement of other maritime claims and sovereignty issues. About ISPSW The Institute for Strategic, Political, Security and Economic Consultancy (ISPSW) is a private institute for research and consultancy. The ISPSW is an objective, task-oriented and politically non-partisan institute. In the increasingly complex international environment of globalized economic processes and worldwide political, ecological, social and cultural change, which occasions both major opportunities and risks, decision- makers in the economic and political arena depend more than ever before on the advice of highly qualified experts. ISPSW offers a range of services, including strategic analyses, security consultancy, executive coaching and intercultural competency. ISPSW publications examine a wide range of topics connected with politics, the economy, international relations, and security/ defense. ISPSW network experts have held – in some cases for decades – executive positions and dispose over a wide range of experience in their respective fields of expertise. © Institut für Strategie- Politik- Sicherheits- und Wirtschaftsberatung ISPSW Giesebrechtstr. 9 Tel +49 (0)30 88 91 89 05 E-Mail: [email protected] 10629 Berlin Fax +49 (0)30 88 91 89 06 Website: http://www.ispsw.de Germany 1 ISPSW Strategy Series: Focus on Defense and International Security Issue The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty No. 573 between Timor-Leste and Australia Dr. Anne-Marie Schleich Sep 2018 Analysis On March 6, 2018, the Foreign Ministers of Australia and Timor-Leste signed a landmark maritime boundaries treaty at the United Nations in New York after a record time of less than two years of negotiations. This Treaty between Australia and the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste Establishing Their Maritime Boundaries in the Timor Sea was the result of a recent conciliation proceeding under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that could potentially serve as a worldwide model for other similar disputes. To understand the unique achievement of this conciliation process, one needs to trace back Timor-Leste’s history and the history of the longstanding maritime disputes and treaties in that region (1). I will also analyse the results of the conciliation process (2), the nature of the proceedings (3), and lessons that can be learnt for the resolution of similar disputes (4). History Timor-Leste, previously also known as Portuguese Timor and later East Timor, has been a Portuguese colony since the 1600s and became also known as Portuguese Timor. In a 1859 treaty with the Dutch, Portugal formally ceded the western half of Timor island to the Dutch. The Japanese occupied the whole island of Timor during World War II. After Indonesia’s proclamation of independence in 1945, Dutch Timor became part of the Indonesian East Nusa Tenggara province; East Timor remained under Portuguese rule. In November 1975 East Timor declared itself independent from Portugal. A few days later, Indonesia invaded East Timor and declared it a province of Indonesia. After 24 years of armed struggle against Indonesia, the majority of East Timoreans in 1999 voted for independence in a UN-supervised referendum. It became independent and was inter- nationally recognized on May 20, 2002 as the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste. Even though the Australian government under Prime Minister John Howard early on supported East Timor’s independence aspirations, relations between the new nation and Australia remained strained because of long- standing disputes over maritime boundaries. The oil and gas fields in the so-called Timor Gap are estimated to be worth roughly $ US 65 billion. The Timor Gap had always posed a problem because of its geological complexity and overlapping seabed claims by both Australia and Indonesia. In 1971 and 1972 Indonesia and Australia had concluded two maritime boundary treaties, which gave Austra- lia considerable advantages in the delineation of the boundaries. There was the 1971 Agreement between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia establishing certain Seabed Boundaries. It was followed by the 1972 Agreement between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia establishing certain seabed boundaries in the area of the Timor and Arafura seas, supplementary to the Agreement of 18 May 1971.1 They were based on the “natural prolongation“ of the continental shelf thus drawing the boundaries north of the median lines between the shores of Australia and Indonesia. Portugal as the then colonial power in East Timor was not part of the negotiations. The ambiguity regarding the East Timor maritime boundaries continued. The 1989 Australian-Indonesian “Timor Gap Treaty” dealt with the joint exploration of the oil resources without addressing the respective territorial claims. The treaty, however, became invalid after East Timor’s independence from Indonesia. On the day of Timor-Leste’s 1 Anais Kedgley Laidlaw and Hao Duy Phan, Interstate Compulsory Conciliation Procedures and the Maritime Boundary Dispute between Timor-Leste and Australia, 2018, working paper © Institut für Strategie- Politik- Sicherheits- und Wirtschaftsberatung ISPSW Giesebrechtstr. 9 Tel +49 (0)30 88 91 89 05 E-Mail: [email protected] 10629 Berlin Fax +49 (0)30 88 91 89 06 Website: http://www.ispsw.de Germany 2 ISPSW Strategy Series: Focus on Defense and International Security Issue The Historic 2018 Maritime Boundary Treaty No. 573 between Timor-Leste and Australia Dr. Anne-Marie Schleich Sep 2018 independence in 2002, the government of the new nation signed the Timor Sea Treaty with Australia. It came into effect in 2003 and established the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA). The treaty outlined the joint exploration of oil and gas resources in the area previously called Timor Gap and divided the revenues in favour of Australia (80%-20%). The “Treaty on Certain Maritime Arrangements in the Timor Sea” (CMATS) came into force in 2007. The terms for the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA) established under the previous Timor Sea Treaty were simi- lar. But CMATS also demarcated the so called Greater Sunrise gas fields (also known as Sunrise and Trouba- dour fields, located 150 km southeast of Timor-Leste and 450 km northwest of Darwin, Australia) in a way more favourable to Australia. However, CMATS granted Timor-Leste a higher share of the estimated potential revenues of US $65 billion (50% instead of 20% under the Timor Sea Treaty). CMATS, again, offered no solu- tions on the maritime boundaries and on how these fields should be developed; two major shortcomings. In fact a 50-year moratorium was imposed on maritime boundary delineation (Strating). Australia has always claimed that its maritime boundary goes as far as its continental shelf, which far surpasses the equidistant line between the two countries. Timor-Leste, however, has been pushing for a maritime border at the median line between the countries. That would have placed the whole Greater Sunrise fields into Timorese waters and jurisdiction. The prevailing political sentiment within Timor-Leste was that CMATS was an unfair deal and impeded the economic development of the young nation. The main Timorese political parties were convinced that the Greater Sunrise field belonged exclusively to Timor-Leste. The dispute turned into an issue of sovereignty. Timor-Leste argued that the border should sit halfway between Timor-Leste and Australia, which would place most of the Greater Sunrise field in Timor-Leste’s territory. Moreover, the government was (and still is) under time pressure as the Bayu Undan gas field within the JDPA, Timor-Leste’s main source of income since 2004, is expected to run out of gas by 2022. In fact, more than 90 % of Timor-Leste’s budget is derived from oil income from the Bayu Undan field. Revelations about Australia’s alleged bugging of the Timor-Leste government offices in Dili in 2004 in order to gain a negotiation advantage caused political outrage in Timor-Leste. In 2013 Timor-Leste started arbitral proceedings against Australia under the Timor Sea Treaty, which were adminis- tered at the International Court of Arbitration to nullify CMATS. One of the grounds was Australia’s alleged 2004 spying operation on Timor-Leste’s negotiators. Timor-Leste terminated the CMATS treaty unilaterally in January 2016.2 It was in this political and historical context that Timor-Leste unexpectedly announced in April 2016 that it was initiating compulsory conciliation proceedings against Australia by invoking Annex V of the 1982 United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS. After all these decades of dispute, Timor-Leste wanted its maritime boundaries to be finally and firmly determined. And this was the only avenue open to it. Shortly before Timor-Leste’s independence, Australia had in 2002 declared the exclusion of any UNCLOS arbitral and judicial proceedings concerning its exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf boundaries.3 Conciliation proceedings, however, are compulsory for UNCLOS member countries. As a signatory to UNCLOS, Australia had no choice but to submit to the procedure despite its immediate protestations. It thereby ended its self- proclaimed moratorium on maritime boundaries dispute resolution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp
    Hastings International and Comparative Law Review Volume 17 Article 3 Number 2 Winter 1994 1-1-1994 Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self- Determination at the International Court of Justice Gerry J. Simpson Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_international_comparative_law_review Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Gerry J. Simpson, Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 323 (1994). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_international_comparative_law_review/vol17/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice By Gerry J. Simpson* Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................ 324 1E. Some Preliminary Remarks about the Case ............. 327 III. International Politics and the International Court: A Functional Dilemma .................................... 329 IV. Substantive Questions of Law .......................... 332 A. The Existence of a Right to Self-Determination...... 333 B. Beneficiaries of the Right to Self-Determination ..... 334 1. Indonesia's TerritorialIntegrity and the Principle of Uti Posseditis................................. 339 2. Enclaves in InternationalLaw .................. 342 3. Historical Ties .................................. 342 C. The Duties of Third Parties Toward Peoples Claiming a Right to Self-Determination ............. 343 V. Conclusion .............................................. 347 * Lecturer in International Law and Human Rights Law, Law Faculty, Univcrity of Melbourne, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasia Asia & Oceania
    Segment Overview Asia & Eurasia Oceania u p. 28 u p. 20 Number of countries 7 4 1,551 ,296 1 1,245 1,218 1 16 14 Number of projects 1 3 In production 2 43 1 1 6 Under development 10 Preparation for development Under exploration (oil and gas reservoirs confirmed) Under exploration Other 466 Production/Reserves 367 Proved reserves (million boe) 214 201 195 210 207 191 Net production (thousand boed) 179 197 190 188 167 166 28 27 27 26 25 25 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 485,275 485,069 483,187 406,828 409,776 / 352,383 Net sales 299,599 281,623 Operating income 264,849 235,814 Net sales (¥ million) 191,070 178,225 Operating income (¥ million) 96,341 94,050 85,541 84,325 73,574 68,319 47,076 41,752 42,601 39,769 36,461 32,228 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 018 INPEX CORPORATION Annual Report 2015 Middle East Americas Japan & Africa u p. 32 u p. 36 u p. 30 6 7 1 Minami-Nagaoka 1 2 Gas Field 1 Naoetsu LNG 3 Terminal 9 7 1 16 10 Natural gas pipeline network (Approx. 1,400 km) etc. 783 857 636 4 Project Overview Project 583 518 505 174 168 169 158 163 155 138 135 132 130 126 117 74 68 65 40 36 30 29 30 27 28 20 25 25 21 21 21 17 18 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 524,528 520,835 500,033 621,513 421,184 357,343 354,136 350,735 333,213 303,819 243,113 205,572 129,522 120,268 118,937 ) 113,662 104,525 93,959 32,555 28,568 25,959 22,771 24,607 16,692 16,693 12,673 11,435 13,351 15,303 5,945 5,525 (7,646) (3,035) 1,028 (6,089) (5,518) ( 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 INPEX CORPORATION Annual Report 2015 019 Project Overview by Region Asia & Oceania In the Asia and Oceania region, INPEX holds participating interests in the Offshore Mahakam Block in Indonesia, which is contributing significantly to earnings, and the large-scale Ichthys and Abadi LNG projects, where development and preparatory development activities are under way.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGAL and COMMERCIAL RISKS of INVESTMENT in the TIMOR GAP Legal and Commercial Risks of Investment in the Timor Gap GILLIAN TRIGGS*
    LEGAL AND COMMERCIAL RISKS OF INVESTMENT IN THE TIMOR GAP Legal and Commercial Risks of Investment in the Timor Gap GILLIAN TRIGGS* [This paper examines the legal and commercial risks for investors and contractors in the Zone of Cooperation of the Timor Gap, both during the transitional period under the administration of the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (‘UNTAET’) and after East Timor gains independence. It is argued that while the Exchange of Notes between Australia and the UNTAET provides stability during the transitional period, there are significant risks to production sharing contractors once East Timor gains independence. The paper also considers the consequences of a possible application by East Timor to the International Court of Justice for the determination of a permanent seabed boundary. While international law indicates that the natural prolongation theory will apply to protect Australia’s claim to the continental shelf, there is a risk that the International Court of Justice will apply the equidistance principle, which would place Area A of the Zone of Cooperation on the East Timorese side of a notional median line. It is suggested that, if a final boundary is neither agreed by Australia and East Timor nor imposed by the International Court of Justice, respective sovereign and commercial interests are best served by some form of joint development regime. A new agreement could provide the foundation for fruitful, long-term relations between East Timor and Australia, by protecting the juridical positions
    [Show full text]
  • Separate Opinion of Judge Vereshchetin
    SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE VERESHCHETIN While 1 am in agreement with the Judgment delivered by the Court, 1 feel obliged to deal in this opinion with one important issue which, in my view, although not addressed in the reasoning of the Judgment, also bars the Court from adjudicating upon the submissions in the Applica- tion of the Portuguese Republic. Besides Indonesia, in the absence of whose consent the Court is pre- vented from exercising its jurisdiction over the Application, there is another "third party" in this case, whose consent was sought neither by Portugal before filing the Application with the Court, nor by Australia before concluding the Timor Gap Treaty. Nevertheless, the Applicant State has acted in this Court in the name of this "third party" and the Treaty has allegedly jeopardized its natural resources. The "third party" at issue is the people of East Timor. Since the Judgment is silent on this matter, one might wrongly con- clude that the people, whose right to self-determination lies at the core of the whole case, have no role to play in the proceedings. This is not to suggest that the Court could have placed the States Parties to the case and the people of East Timor on the same level procedurally. Clearly, only States may be parties in cases before the Court (Article 34 of the Statute of the Court). This is merely to Say that the right of a people to self-determination, by definition, requires that the wishes of the people concerned at least be ascertained and taken into account by the Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Large Marine Domain
    Collation and Analysis of Oceanographic Datasets for National Marine Bioregionalisation: The Northern Large Marine Domain. A report to the Australian Government, National Oceans Office. May 2005 CSIRO Marine Research Peter Rothlisberg Scott Condie Donna Hayes Brian Griffiths Steve Edgar Jeff Dunn Cover Image designed by Vincent Lyne CSIRO Marine Researchi Cover Design Lea Crosswell and Louise Bell CSIRO Marine Research Collation and Analysis of Oceanographic Datasets – The Northern Large Marine Domain Contents Contents...........................................................................................................................................i List of Figures.................................................................................................................................ii 1. Summary................................................................................................................................1 2. Project Objectives..................................................................................................................2 3. Background............................................................................................................................2 4. Data Storage and Metadata....................................................................................................2 5 Setting for the Northern Large Marine Domain ....................................................................3 5.1 Geomorphology..............................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Timor Sea Treaty Between the Government of Australia and the Government of East Timor, Done at Dili on 20 May 2002
    Timor Sea Treaty between the Government of Australia and the Government of East Timor, done at Dili on 20 May 2002. AMENDED NATIONAL INTEREST ANALYSIS Proposed binding treaty action 1. It is proposed to bring into force the Timor Sea Treaty between the Government of Australia and the Government of East Timor (the Treaty). Date of proposed binding treaty action 2. The proposed treaty action will enter into force on the day that both Parties have notified each other in writing that their respective requirements for entry into force have been complied with (Article 25). Upon entry into force the treaty will be taken to have effect and all of its provisions will apply and be taken to have applied on and from the date of signature, 20 May 2002. 3. The treaty was signed in Dili on 20 May 2002. 4. Upon entry into force of the Treaty, the Exchange of Notes constituting an Agreement between the Government of the Democratic Republic of East Timor and the Government of Australia concerning Arrangements for Exploration and Exploitation of Petroleum in an Area of the Timor Sea Between East Timor and Australia, done at Dili on 20 May 2002, will cease to have effect. Date of tabling of the proposed treaty action 5. 25 June 2002. Summary of the purpose of the proposed treaty action and why it is in the national interest 6. The Timor Sea between northern Australia and East Timor contains proven petroleum resources in the seabed. Australia and East Timor have competing claims to the resources of this seabed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tectonic History of the Banda Arcs, Eastern Indonesia: a Review
    J. geol. Soc. London, Vol. 136, 1979, pp. 519-527,2 figs. Printed inNorthern Ireland. The tectonic history of the Banda Arcs, eastern Indonesia: a review M. S. Norvick SUMMARY: The Banda Sea is underlain by a small marginal oceanic plate, which is believed to have formed during the early Tertiary. Unlike other marginal seas to the N, the spreading of the Banda platelet was restricted by surrounding continental blocks. Its present complexity is a result of late Miocene-earlyPliocene collision and obduction of theBanda Sea island arc system over the leading edge of the Australian-lrian continental plate. Transcurrent faultingon the northern limb of the collision zone may have accentuated curvature of the arc. Subduction and volcanicitv ceased after collision in the Timor and Seram sectors, but are still active at the eastern extremity of the arc. Adouble spiral line of geologicallyvery complex, based on bathymetry (Mammerickx et al. 1976), reg- small, mountainous islands make up the Banda Arcs ional gravity (Vening Meinesz 1954; Chamalaun et al. of eastern Indonesia (Fig. 1). Although onshore out- 1976; Milsom 1977)and earthquake distribution crop information is scattered, and geophysical data on (Hamilton 1974a; Cardwell & Isacks1978). Seismic the deep seas that cover 90% of the area sparse, the lineshave been published across the Timor region tectonic history of the region has stimulated discussion (Branson1974; Beck & Lehner1974; Crostella & formany years, and produced different (sometimes Powell 1975) and the Seram Trough (Audley-Charles conflicting) interpretations. The present review attempts& Carter 1978). Two 1976 oceanographic surveys run to reinterpretto critically thedata and some of by Scripps(‘Indopac’ programme) and CCOP (‘Val- theplate tectonic theories on theevolution of the divia’ cruise) collected valuable seismic refraction and Banda Arcs in the light of recent geological mapping reflection data over the deep water areas (Purdy et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission From: the Timor Sea Justice Campaign To: the Senate
    Submission from: The Timor Sea Justice Campaign To: The Senate Standing Committees on Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Regarding: Australia’s declarations made under certain international laws 11 October 2019 Timor Sea Justice Campaign Submission regarding Australia’s declarations made under certain international laws About the Timor Sea Justice Campaign The Timor Sea Justice Campaign was a 15 year long, people-powered campaign that successfully helped to pressure the Australian Government to set permanent maritime boundaries with Timor-Leste. The campaign’s social media channels are now used to share information about the prosecution of Witness K and Bernard Collaery. This submission was prepared by Tom Clarke, the campaign’s spokesperson, and Monique Hurley, a human rights lawyer. Summary The Australian Government has utilised a range of reprehensible tactics to take revenue from natural resources belonging to its neighbour Timor-Leste. Underpinning these efforts to rip-off our neighbour was a series of decisions made by the Howard Government in 2002 to withdraw Australia’s recognition of the maritime boundary jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Australian Government’s withdrawal of recognition happened just two months before Timor-Leste became an independent nation, knowing that the Timorese would want to negotiate – as is their right – permanent maritime boundaries with their neighbours in accordance with international law. The withdrawal meant the Government of Timor-Leste had limited avenues to challenge the Australian Government’s attempts to stonewall its requests to establish permanent maritime boundaries or challenge Australia’s unilateral depletion of contested resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Fieldwork in Timor-Leste
    Understanding Timor-Leste, on the ground and from afar (eds) and Bexley Nygaard-Christensen This ground-breaking exploration of research in Timor-Leste brings together veteran and early-career scholars who broadly Fieldwork in represent a range of fieldwork practices and challenges from colonial times to the present day. Here, they introduce readers to their experiences of conducting anthropological, historical and archival fieldwork in this new nation. The volume further Timor-Leste explores the contestations and deliberations that have been in Timor-Leste Fieldwork symptomatic of the country’s nation-building process, high- Understanding Social Change through Practice lighting how the preconceptions of development workers and researchers might be challenged on the ground. By making more explicable the processes of social and political change in Timor- Leste, the volume offers a critical contribution for those in the academic, policy and development communities working there. This is a must-have volume for scholars, other fieldworkers and policy-makers preparing to work in Timor-Leste, invaluable for those needing to understand the country from afar, and a fascinating read for anyone interested in the Timorese world. ‘Researchers and policymakers reading up on Timor Leste before heading to the field will find this handbook valuable. It is littered with captivating fieldwork stories. The heart-searching is at times searingly honest. Best of all, the book beautifully bridges the sometimes painful gap between Timorese researchers and foreign experts (who can be irritating know-alls). Academic anthropologists and historians will find much of value here, but the Timor policy community should appreciate it as well.’ – Gerry van Klinken, KITLV ‘This book is well worth reading by academics, activists and policy-makers in Timor-Leste and also those interested in the country’s development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Timor Gap, 1972-2002
    The Timor Gap, 1972-2002 Robert J. King July 2002 The Timor Sea Treaty between Australia and East Timor was signed in Dili on 20 May 2002, the first day of East Timor’s existence as an internationally recognized independent state. The treaty was signed for Australia by Prime Minister John Howard, and for East Timor by Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri. The treaty created a Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA) of 75,000 sq km in the Timor Sea, with 90 per cent of revenue from production within the area going to East Timor and 10 per cent to Australia. The JPDA covered 100 per cent of a $US1.6 billion project being developed at the Bayu-Undan oil and gas fields by Phillips Petroleum and about 20 per cent of the ten trillion cubic feet Sunrise and Troubadour reservoirs.1An annex to the treaty awarded 18 per cent of revenues from the Greater Sunrise field, a deposit that straddles the eastern corner of the joint area, to East Timor. The Timor Sea Treaty will remain in force until there is a permanent seabed delimitation between Australia and East Timor, or for thirty years from the date of its entry into force, whichever is the sooner (article 22). The Timor Sea Treaty replaced the Timor Gap (Zone of Cooperation) Treaty between Australia and Indonesia, which lapsed when East Timor ceased to be a province of Indonesia following a United Nations supervised act of self-determination on 30 August 1999. The Joint Petroleum Development Area created by the Timor Sea Treaty covers Zone of Cooperation Area A established by the Timor Gap Treaty.
    [Show full text]
  • The East Timor Case Before the International Court of Justice * East
    Symposium: The East Timor Case before the International Court of Justice * East Timor Moves into the World Court Christine M. Chinkin ** L Introduction The events leading to Indonesia's military invasion and subsequent annexation of East Timor, accompanied by repeated allegations of gross violations of human rights,1 are well known. The legality of Indonesia's claim to East Timor as constituting the 27th province of Indonesia has been the subject of much debate.2 Sixteen years after the occupation, proceedings were commenced in the International Court of Justice to bring Indonesia's claim and the contrary claim of the people of East Timor to their right to self-determination under judicial scrutiny. However these claims will be raised only in * Note from the Editors: The European Journal cf International Law has decided to occasionally publish track* reviewing the main ifp»ff of cases pfndiny before the International Court of Justice The views expressed in such •rides are strictly personal, and do not necessarily reflect those of the editorial board. •• LLB; LLM; PhD (Sydney); Professor of Law, University of Southampton. This article was first presented as a paper at a conference on the Legal Issues Arising from the East Timor Conflict, sponsored by the Human Rights Centre, University of New South Wales and the International Jurists for East Timor, March 1992. An earlier version appeared as The Merits of Portugal's Case Against Australia'. 15 New South Walts Law Journal (1992) 423. 1 iTtcfc- u£vc been nmncroos rcpocXi by noo^jpT^ffPiinrnf^i OfBwni7wTioftt snicn ss Amnesty intf I'n^^otffl* since 1973 of human rights violations in East Timor.
    [Show full text]
  • Official Committee Hansard
    COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Official Committee Hansard JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON TREATIES Reference: Timor Sea treaties MONDAY, 14 OCTOBER 2002 CANBERRA BY AUTHORITY OF THE PARLIAMENT INTERNET The Proof and Official Hansard transcripts of Senate committee hearings, some House of Representatives committee hearings and some joint com- mittee hearings are available on the Internet. Some House of Representa- tives committees and some joint committees make available only Official Hansard transcripts. The Internet address is: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard To search the parliamentary database, go to: http://search.aph.gov.au JOINT COMMITTEE ON TREATIES Monday, 14 October 2002 Members: Ms Julie Bishop (Chair), Mr Wilkie (Deputy Chair), Senators Barnett, Bartlett, Kirk, Marshall, Mason, Stephens and Tchen and Mr Adams, Mr Bartlett, Mr Ciobo, Mr Martyn Evans, Mr Hunt, Mr King and Mr Bruce Scott Senators and members in attendance: Senators Barnett, Kirk, Marshall, Stephens and Tchen and Mr Adams, Ms Julie Bishop, Mr Ciobo, Mr Martyn Evans and Mr Wilkie Terms of reference for the inquiry: Timor Sea treaties WITNESSES ATWELL, Ms Julie-Anne, Senior Legal Officer, Office of International Law, Attorney- General’s Department...................................................................................................................................270 BUCKLEY, Mr Michael Thomas, Manager, Resources and Environment Tax Unit, Business Income Division, Department of the Treasury ...........................................................................................270
    [Show full text]